Where crucifixes go to collect dust

The Times reports that a warehouse on the grounds of Mount Loretto is the final resting place for sacramental and liturgical objects from closed churches around the archdiocese. The article notes that it was only in 2004, when a bishop walked into a bar and noticed an object from his first church decorating the shelves of the drinking establishment, that the archdiocese thought about crafting some regulations about how to dispose of crucifixes and vestments and other holy objects that were no longer needed.
(What a poignant commentary on the short-sightedness of our hierarchy. If someone had opened their eyes to this glaring issue, we would be spared the sight of 1st degree relics being sold on ebay and Brooklyn hipsters using Catholic chalices for candy bowls.) The article also notes that this policy became especially significant when the archdiocese reneged on its 2007 promise not to sell any closed parishes to developers.

Catholic Church Shopping, Part XIII: Meh

I attended Mass today at a mid-island parish founded in 1914. The age of the church building was uncertain. It looked old from the outside, but the interior had some modern elements. Overall it was quite attractive, with beautiful stained glass windows and traditional Stations of the Cross. The mass was attended by about 200 people. About 65% seemed to be in their 60s and 70s, 25% in their middle age, with the rest a smattering of young families, which was surprising since this parish also has a school. The priest was American and quite young, perhaps no more than 35, so I was eager to hear him speak. Although it was obvious that he had faith, he really said nothing of any consequence. With tomorrow being the feast of the Immaculate Conception, he noted how Mary needed to be extremely holy in order to bear our Lord, and that we all need to let God into our hearts this Christmas season. That was it. It wasn't a  stupid sermon; it wasn't heterodox; it was just extremely disappointing. The choice of music was uninspiring, rather than banal. The parish has a Bible study and some brief hours of Eucharistic adoration and novena which are, no doubt, attended solely by senior citizens, judging by the makeup of the congregation. Still, it seemed like the church was thriving, at least by the low standards of anemic modern American Catholicism. They paid off their debt and they were able to send over $8,000 to the Filipino typhoon victims. But when all the seniors die off, who will pick up the slack?

To me, this parish is at a place where a lot of failing parishes were 20 years ago. By the numbers it is successful. A stable neighborhood has resulted in a school with enough enrollment to pay for itself. The number of parishioners are enough to sustain the parish and throw a few nice parties a year. The people are cheerful rather than spiritually fervent in any way. Then the old folks start dying off. The young people go to high school and college, move away from home and fall away from the faith. If they marry at all, they marry late and artificially limit their families. Of the few that retain the faith, they will live somewhere else. A certain percentage of the retirees start moving to New Jersey or Florida. And then all it will take will be a city social service agency placed nearby, or a few dark faces moving in, and the neighborhood will quickly "change," and this model parish will then resemble St. Peter's or Immaculate Conception or St. Mary's. We've seen it all happen before.

The Catholic Titanic

In a brutal address to representatives of Staten Island parishes, the Rev. John O'Hara, former pastor of St. Teresa's and now archdiocesan director of strategic pastoral planning, told the assembly that the Catholic Church on Staten Island would "go down faster than the Titanic" if her parishes didn't maximize efficiencies and save money by cooperating, consolidating and closing bleeding churches. Specifics seem to be unavailable at this time. Under the Cardinal's "Making All Things New" initiative, all island churches are now grouped in six clusters based upon the criteria of demography and geography. The churches in each cluster will have to figure out how to survive.

The initiative is the brainchild of a consulting firm called The Reid Group, whose representatives were present at the aforementioned meeting. The Reid Group seems to consist of a bunch of slick lawyers and accountants who have made a great living off of the carcasses of struggling Catholic dioceses nationwide. Their modus operandi seems to be to swoop in with their experts and studies and reports and figure out how to close unprofitable parishes in the nicest and most professional way possible. The employment of such a group is a stark sign that the hierarchy of this archdiocese is hopelessly blinded by a carnal mentality that only sees the problem as one of dollars and cents, and hobbled by a defeatist spirit that can only propose retreat upon retreat as the only solution.

Even the words that greet you when you visit the website of The Reid Group are negative, depressing and hopeless in the extreme: "Change is in abundance! Pick up any newspaper or magazine today and there is a good chance that you will find a news article about change. Managing change well will not alleviate loss, but will lessen some of the pain of loss." With friends like these, who needs enemies?

There was not one word in Father O'Hara's speech or in the gloomy words of The Reid Group about the spiritual aspect to our problems. We- the Church- are suffering because we have rejected the Father, abandoned Christ and lost the Spirit. The long and short of it is that with extremely few exceptions, we- the ones who still for some reason attend Mass and superficially adhere to the Church- do not live our lives like we really believe it. If we really believed,  we would not only live lives that would be an example to the world, but we would be fighting aggressively for the lost sheep of the Church. Instead, we live and think exactly like the world and we confirm the sinners in their sin with our tolerance and our silence.We are in desperate need of a revival. Who will show us the way?

Father O'Hara's Titanic metaphor was apt. This ship is going down. However, the crew of the Titanic at least tried to save the ship before it sunk; the crew at the helm of the Church have been actively punching holes in the hull of the ship, demotivating the passengers and mindlessly twiddling their thumbs for 50 years. And now our leaders and their opportunistic consultants are spending their time and our money figuring out how to merely slow the decline and let the Church die as painlessly as possible. That is not a solution. This disaster started with the priesthood; and the reaction must begin in the priesthood. But a revival of the faith isn't going to originate with men who, in the midst of this utterly unprecedented crisis, are preoccupied with amnesty legislation or who blather syrupy platitudes or tell jokes from the pulpit week after week. This spiritual revival won't originate in men who think it's a good idea to invite a female Methodist minister to preach to a Catholic congregation, such as happened today at Blessed Sacrament. We need saints who believe, really believe with all their hearts, that Jesus is the Way, the Truth and the Light, and that He established the Catholic Church as His One True Church. Being animated in the spirit of the Church Militant and becoming saints is the only way this dying body of cowards, hypocrites and cultural Catholics will be resurrected. Anything less and we're left with the ice cold and degenerate social club we have today. May God send us saints, we humbly pray.

Come Rack! Come Rope!

The Advance ran an article today about the Catholic opposition to Obama's Health Care mandate, in which several Staten Island clerics are quoted making some pretty strong comments about the mandate's unconstitutional infringement on Catholic religious freedom. Monsignor Edmund J. Whalen, principal of  Farrell High School, even declares that the Church will resist the mandate "to the limit."

I have two comments:

1. In addition to pointing out how this law is a blatant and illegal violation of our constitutional rights, our bishops and priests should be preaching about why artificial contraception, the root of so many other sins, is evil. But we never hear a thing about it. In fact, the flock both overwhelmingly uses contraception and thinks it's fine. Is it any wonder they don't understand what all the fuss is about? The bishops are saying that we oppose the mandate because it forces us to violate our religion, which is true. But more to the point is the fact that opposition to artificial contraception is a part of our religious belief because artificial contraception is evil. Why is that angle ignored?

2. To what "limit" exactly is the good Monsignor referring? The exhaustion of all legal appeals, or something further? Monsignor Whalen, of course, is only a local priest. What exactly is the strategy of our leaders, the bishops, should we lose this lawsuit? Will they shrug their shoulders, tell the flock that they gave it their best shot, and then prove their loyalty to divine America by burning incense at its altar and obeying this immoral law? I pray to God that will not be the case, but we are not being told what to expect. This is a watershed moment in the history of the Church. The regime in charge of this once great land of liberty is telling us that we must betray our Faith. We simply cannot obey. The bishops must prepare us for the worst, and clearly tell our enemies that we will never cooperate with EVIL. The bishops have to tell the flock that we will therefore need to prepare ourselves for persecution that could mean the imprisonment of Catholics and the loss of our churches, but to be comforted by the fact that it is better to be an outlaw than an apostate; it is better to disobey Obama than turn our backs on Christ, and that the blood of martyrs is always the fertilizer for a stronger and purer Church than before. Michael Voris recently produced an excellent, excellent, must-watch critique of this issue and Cardinal Dolan's lack of leadership. Click here.

Latin Mass at Sacred Heart

Thanks to the heads-up from blog contributor "Anonymous", I attended a Latin Mass at Sacred Heart on a Saturday evening a few weeks ago.

Contrary to my expectations (and perhaps contrary to the hopes of those who scheduled it for 7:30 pm on a Saturday evening in October), there were about 100 people present. The Filipina ladies in mantillas that I have always seen at Latin Masses in New York City were present, kindly distributing booklets at the door to facilitate comprehension and participation. Yes, the majority of those present were senior citizens with a sprinkling of middle aged people, but there were also a surprising number of families with young children and some teenagers. In a clever move, the organizers posted signs requesting that worshippers confine themselves to the first 10 pews on either side of the aisle, thus avoiding the dispiriting sight of the usual Catholic seating arrangement (i.e. as far away from everyone else as possible). A holy silence prevailed as I entered the church, but the extraordinary atmosphere for this extraordinary Mass couldn't prevent the teenagers and some adults from doing that infuriating, bastardized form of pseudo-Catholic genuflection (slightly bend a knee and then swat away imaginary flies from in front of your face).

Father Jerome, the pastor, was the celebrant and did a wonderful job. He admitted, during his short sermon, that he had to teach himself the Latin, and so he apologized for any mispronunciations he might have made. That was a telling statement. Would a priest go to the trouble of teaching himself to say the Latin Mass just to appease a few cranks once or twice every 2 years? Or does Father Jerome believe in its spiritual value and does he plan to re-introduce the Old Mass into his parish on a more regular basis? If he can draw 100 people on a Saturday night, how many would attend at 10:30 on Sunday morning?

The Mass was beautiful and serene. The usual organist was on duty, but she played mostly Latin hymns rather than the awful, un-singable stuff she usually chooses. People sang. It was a great experience, which I hope will be repeated. The Filipina ladies were asking for names and email addresses afterwards, in order to organize supporters to agitate for more of the Latin Mass. I haven't heard from them yet, but time will tell. The Mass was a great success which I hope will be the sign of a resurgence of Tradition in our local churches.

Outdoor Masses

Interesting topic, at least to me: the pastor of St. Ann's church, Fr. Joy Mampilly, recently celebrated the Mass at South Beach, with a small part of the congregation in attendance. The occasion was to mark the 1 year anniversary of Hurricane Sandy, during which 1 of the parish's members was killed. There was really no reason to hold the Mass on the beach, except to excite emotion among the participants. In fact, the Redemptoris Sacramentum states explicitly:

Chapter V
CERTAIN OTHER MATTERS CONCERNING THE EUCHARIST

1. The Place for the Celebration of Holy Mass
[108.] The celebration of the Eucharist is to be carried out in a sacred place, unless in a particular case necessity requires otherwise. In this case the celebration must be in a decent place. The diocesan Bishop shall be the judge for his diocese concerning this necessity, on a case-by-case basis.

There was no necessity to celebrate this Mass outdoors, such as the Pope does in the event of gigantic crowds, or as happens on the battlefield in wartime. This was done for mere dramatic effect and for sentimentality. And was permission given by the Cardinal? So what will be the result? Yet another blow against sacredness and sacramentality. Why have Mass in a church? Why even go to Mass? Let's worship God in His own great outdoors! Young women, already indoctrinated by wedding shows on basic cable to yearn for scenic outdoor weddings, will rightly ask why their priest cannot bless their marriage on the beach, or on a cruise ship, at the country club or on the top of Mount Moses, rather than in some stuffy church with all those grim statues and crucified Jesus. Will the pastor of St. Ann's church have a convincing answer?

Oddo hits back

So, the tone of this spat over Mount Manresa is starting to turn ugly and anti-clerical. Yes, the Rev. Hallinan's article in the Advance was rude and disingenuous, but Councilman Oddo, a man known for his temper, didn't have to respond with base insults. In a tweet, the Councilman called the priest arrogant, indifferent and disrespectful and accused him of "hiding behind his collar" because he hadn't returned the Councilman's phone call. Now, I agree that the Order and Father Hallinan are coming across as arrogant, indifferent and disrespectful, but 1. it's going too far to publicly describe them as such after a single phone call is not returned, and 2. I wouldn't say that anyone is hiding behind their collar. That accusation implies that Councilman Oddo would physically assault Father Hallinan if he weren't a priest. Oddo goes on to say ""It's curious why he's so invested in this sale", implying that Father Hallinan is going to benefit financially from the sale of Mount Manresa! While I think the Jesuits' actions regarding Mount Manresa can be criticized, Jim Oddo is starting to use language that sounds like Henry VIII when his annulment application was rejected. Is there more to Jim Oddo's anti-clericalism than just the Mount Manresa issue? Did some priest reprove Oddo for his immoral living arrangements?